How can liberalism’s favorite economist know so little about the topic he is known for? New York Times economist, Paul Krugman had this to say in today’s op-ed regarding the Twinkie situation…

Consider the question of tax rates on the wealthy. The modern American right, and much of the alleged center, is obsessed with the notion that low tax rates at the top are essential to growth. Remember that Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, charged with producing a plan to curb deficits, nonetheless somehow ended up listing “lower tax rates” as a “guiding principle.”

Yet in the 1950s incomes in the top bracket faced a marginal tax rate of 91, that’s right, 91 percent, while taxes on corporate profits were twice as large, relative to national income, as in recent years. The best estimates suggest that circa 1960 the top 0.01 percent of Americans paid an effective federal tax rate of more than 70 percent, twice what they pay today...

… Along the way, however, we’ve forgotten something important — namely, that economic justice and economic growth aren’t incompatible. America in the 1950s made the rich pay their fair share; it gave workers the power to bargain for decent wages and benefits; yet contrary to right-wing propaganda then and now, it prospered. And we can do that again.

Yes, because business will certainly prosper with an added burden of a 91% tax rate on the wealthy, and a corporate rate double what it is today. It will surely create a scenario where wealthy business owners and small business owners alike will announce thousand upon thousands of job openings.

It’s no wonder Krugman is heralded as an economic hero in liberal circles. Reality however, offers a different vantage point.

Mitt Romney spoke in Arizona today and somehow had his speech taken over by a Bizzaro Romney – essentially selling his tax plan by calling on the “top 1%” to “pay their fair share”.

Apparently Romney’s been smoking the same thing they indulge in down at Occupy Wall Street. Playing the class warfare card and actually invoking the rhetoric of the President and the handout-loving Occupiers?

Does this mark the death knell for a man seeking the GOP nomination with a base of voters who are already wary of his flip-flopping, Massachusetts liberal ways? By demonstrating and reiterating that he is the most liberal member of the pack?

Mitt Romney embraced the language of the Occupy movement in order to sell his tax policy today, saying he wants to maintain the current progressivity in the tax code, while lowering rates for all.

“I am going to lower rates across the board for all Americans by 20%. And in order to limit any impact on the deficit, because I do not want to add to the deficit, and also in order to make sure we continue to have progressivity as we’ve had in the past in our code, I’m going to limit the deductions and exemptions particularly for high income folks. And by the way, I want to make sure you understand that, for middle income families, the deductibility of home mortgage interest and charitable contributions will continue. But for high income folks, we are going to cut back on that, so we make sure the top 1% pay their fair share or more.”

Romney also appropriated the term “fairness” to sell his plan, taking a page from President Barack Obama’s playbook.

Invoking the playbook of the most economically inept President of our time is not exactly a way to endear yourself to conservatives, Mitt. Even the establishment Republicans had to roll their eyes whilst their ‘inevitable’ candidate spoke in Obamanomics.

How embarrassing this must be for President Obama, whose major speech theme so far this campaign season has been that every single American, no matter how rich, should pay their “fair share” of taxes.

Because how unfair — indeed, un-American — it is for an office worker like, say, Warren Buffet’s secretary to dutifully pay her taxes, while some well-to-do people with better educations and higher incomes end up paying a much smaller tax rate.

Or, worse, skipping their taxes altogether.

A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama’s executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven’t paid any share, let alone their fair share.